If you could change one of these election results, which one would you change?

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

If you could change one of these election results, such as having Goldwater beat Johnson or McGovern beat Nixon etc, which would you pick?

[Frodo]

Definitely 2000 -we would be in a much happier place had Al Gore been President instead of George W. Bush.

[Miles]

1980

[TNF]

1964 - Goldwater wouldn't have signed onto the Voting Rights Act or Civil Rights Acts of 1965 but would have continued the War in Vietnam. Democrats gain seats in 1966 and go full 'Law and Order' in 1968 and kick him out of office easily

1972 - McGovern gets his ass kicked in 1976 because of the sh**t economy he presides over his entire Presidency

1980 - Carter continues his anti-Soviet politics, deregulation, and enacts supply-side policies in addition to cutting welfare and beefing up military spending. The economy is sh**t, leading to the GOP taking control of Congress in 1982. Carter's lameduck presidency is saved by a mild recovery, which allows Mondale to beat Bush in a close race in 1984

2000 - 9/11 happens: Gore invades Afghanistan and Iraq, Republicans impeach him for ignoring 'bin Laden determined to strike US' memo, John McCain wins in 2004

9/11 doesn't happen: Gore gets kicked out of office in 2004 because of the bad economy

2008 - nothing really different in 2009-10, minus Obamacare and a smaller stimulus package. Democrats make big gains in 2010; McCain uses ground troops in Libya in 2011, causing the brittle economic recovery to stall as gas prices go crazy and McCain decides not to seek a second term in 2012. Hillary Clinton wins in 2012 with an impressive mandate and uses it to expand the War in Libya and open up a new front in Iraq against ISIS, basically lighting up the whole Middle East

[Mr. Smith]

1980.

[Zioneer]

Technically, I'd like to change 1976 so that Ford narrowly wins (or Reagan somehow wins the nomination and presidency) and have Mo Udall not have Parkinsons so that he can win in 1980 and basically be a liberal, not-terrible Reagan.

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

Really torn between 1980 and 2000 for a ton of reasons. Gun to my head, I'd say 2000.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Ugh, all of them probably. Obama and Reagan were at least pretty good though the opponents slightly better (less so for McCain in hindsight).

1972
1964

2000

2008
1980

[Del Tachi]

1980:  Give Carter a second-term and get H.W. from '85 to '93

Interestingly, if this were the case and everything after 1993 was the same as OTL then every single incumbent President who has sought a second term would have been reelected going back to Herbert Hoover.  The only "exception" would be Gerald Ford, but his case is a bit unique as he had never stood before a national electorate before. 

[Sumner 1868]

1972 is the only one where I see a overall positive effect from a change in result.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Hmm. I don't like volatility in the tax rates, and I think Reagan brought them down much too low. If the US could tax at pre-Reagan rates today, who knows what America could accomplish. That being said, raising them back would be a disaster. Plus, Clinton did manage to wipe out the deficit, so... maybe not 1980.

I guess I'd go with 2000. Bush was less transformative, but the country was in an interestingly hopeful place after the '90s. Handing the torch to someone else could have yielded more positive results.

[ElectionsGuy]

1964

[OSR stands with Israel]

If you could change one of these election results, such as having Goldwater beat Johnson or McGovern beat Nixon etc, which would you pick?

1964

[Antonio the Sixth]

1980, though 1972 comes very close.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Undecided between 1980 and 2000.

[Phony Moderate]

2008; Berlusconi being returned was terrible.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

1976 would be best--Ford is better than Carter, and the odds of Reagan winning in 1980 seems pretty low if Ford wins.

[VPH]

1972. Definitely.

[SATW]

2008

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I would not change any before my birth, as the butterfly effect of such a dramatic change would quite likely write me out of existence. 2000.

[Mercenary]

1964, easily.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I'm not an LBJ Fan in any sense of the word, but goldwater would have been much worse.

Nixon was a criminal, but at least his policies were pretty good. McGovern would have been a terrible president.

Reagan was great, Carter was terrible.

I've soured on Obama after enthusiastically supporting him in 2008 and supporting him with reservations in 2012, but McCain is far worse and might have died in office, giving the country to Sarah Palin. So definitely no.

As for 2000, I have my disagreements with Gore, but the fact is that Bush can't hold a candle to him. So I'll go with that.

[RogueBeaver]

1964, easily.

[jaichind]

1964

[JonathanSwift]

1964.